Live data from Hacker News

Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

rufatmammadli.medium.com

431–440 of 515 posts

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#431

If AI was a real thing, instead of phony baloney probabilistic bullsh!t, then we'd already have AI-driven tools that take crappy, bloated, slow, but correctly working systems built by humans and turn them into smaller, faster, correctly working AI-enhanced systems. Right?

What if current AI is also crappy, bloated and slow?

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#432
post #98
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP is obviously talking about mobile apps.

Yeah, that Microsoft App Store on mobile is a b**h.

It's a bit of a shame they abandoned it with Windows Phone, but you can see why developers don't want three completely different mobile targets.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#433
post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is impossible to know so it is true, you can't provide any top-level logic to justify 0, you need some facts

If "top level logic" is supposed to mean "analytic statements" then you are right. The optimal price cannot be derived analytically. As this is such a pointlessly contrived interpretation of the term "logic" in this context, I chose to use a different one: Is there a set of empirical circumstances under which an optimisation algorithm could conclude that the optimal price is zero? The answer to that is clearly yes.

Top level logic is supposed to mean the logic the comment I'm responding to uses to justify free. You know, "in this context". And I'm not talking about "optimal", just a single price of 0

Now, what exactly is the point of you insisting on your wrong interpretation?

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#434
post #314

Web apps are much faster to install and update. 1) Your browser is always open, whereas you need to close your current app and open the app store app 2) Google Search is better at giving you what you want in the fewest number of keystrokes than any search from any other company including app store search boxes 3) installing a "web app" is one click after the google search results or if someone posts a link. As you mi…

Lol stop putting the web on a pedestal like we don’t have to go through hoops just to reject cookies

Thanks to Brave[0], I can't remember the last time I had to reject cookies.

[0] https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices...

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be blunt, you do not have to create a developer account, sign binaries, or share 30% of your revenue with Microsoft. MS's API are not a mess in my opinion. You do have several options (traditional Win32, .NET, UWP, etc.). These options all work fairly well and are very flexible. As for, Apple, I do not know but I suspect you can make Mac applications without a developer account. You need a developer account for iP…

If you don't sign your Windows installer, then the first N users to use it will get a scary pop-up message saying that the AV "protected your PC." I think you might also need do code-signing if you distribute through the MS store. Compare with the web where LetsEncrypt just works without demanding a king's ransom. As for the APIs, it is very easy to get into dependency hell between all the different UI technologies,…

It's a bit worse with windows. You can get a scary warning or you can get smartscreened to death and the app will be prevented from starting. This is random / depending on functionality and effectively impossible to test with 100% certainty.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't sign your binaries on macOS, the friction for the user to run your app is prohibitive, outside of developer-focused communities.

It didn’t take my kids long to learn how to run unsigned binaries, and neither of them are developers.

kids will learn just about anything with the right motivation. adults who you are trying to get to pay you to use your software on the other hand...

well as someone who runs a few unsigned binaries myself. Its not hard if you know what to do but apple makes a big deal about how its "unsafe" and this freaks non tech people out.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#437
post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What country only lets you file your taxes and do banking via a smartphone. It's always been an app in addition to a website.

In sweden you can't login to A LOT of stuff without a smartphone. Including taxes, getting a covid certificate, applying to rent an apartment.

This seems very unlikely to me, as Sweden is known to be one of the most social countries in Europe, and such a requirement would not only discriminate against the less well-off, but also against the elderly and disabled. It would be very surprising if a majority could be found for such a regulation in Sweden.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#438
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's ask the question differently: what problems were solved? With your examples, it could be: - introduce global spell checker. - have emoji? - fix blurry icons? - being able to search through crash logs? - not having to switch between windows. Do we need GBs instead of MBs for that? Why? Was that problem not fixed already? Could we not fix it in a way that didn't demand magnitudes more resources? I'm asking, becau…

> Let's ask the question differently: what problems were solved? A few more: * Seamless internationalization. If you're a native English speaker you probably never experienced the "fun" of dealing with French and Russian in the same text document. Pre-Unicode supported English + one other language, if that other language wasn't too weird. * Lots of tiny life quality improvements. Eg, not seeing windows repaint costs…

> * Seamless internationalization. If you're a native English speaker you probably never experienced the "fun" of dealing with French and Russian in the same text document. Pre-Unicode supported English + one other language, if that other language wasn't too weird.

For some programs, that hasn't changed. I use OneNote heavily to write some sort of personal info database I always look up when I forget something or need to reproduce a command verbatim quickly. The act of writing it and organizing the data also heavily reinforces my ability to memorize thing in my mind in and of itself too. So I'm quite fond of that little program.

When I tried to use it while learning Chinese I ended up having to turn off the spelling/grammar correction. It just can't function with two languages in the same notebook. All the Chinese text had the red squiggly lines warning you of a mistake and I found no way to enable the support for more than one language. You must select /one/ language for the spell checker in that program.

Or disable the spellchecker, which is what I did in the end.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that makes me crazy is that the thing that we do on computers are basically the same each year, yet software are more and more heavy. For example just in 2010 a Linux distribution with a DE just started did consume 100Mb of RAM, an optimized version 60Mb of RAM. I remember it perfectly. I had 2Gb of RAM and did not have even a swap partition. Now just a decade later, a computer with less than 8Gb of RAM is…

Windows 98 was often running on fragmented disks. I recall it taking minutes before I could do useful work. And having multiple apps open at once was more rare. While possible it often ended in crashes or unusable slowness.

Experienced same, it was faster to not multitask, do one thing a time. You would think launching 2 tasks would take 2x time with same resources, but it felt more like 3-4x. Disk was 1GB back then. I blame it on disk seek times and less advanced IO scheduling.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#440
post #193

One problem is that we use a full word processor that's powerful enough to typeset a book to distribute basic text documents when simple markup would be just as readable, and more easily usable on a wide variety of devices (and easier to make accessible for disabled people) So when my doctor sends me a one page checklist of how to prepare for a procedure, I have to open it in a powerful word processor and since it's…

Not until long ago, we had RTF, a simple and universal rich text format that was free, simple and available on all platforms. On Windows, Wordpad was plenty enough for most needs, came preinstalled for free and barely consumed any resources, but I understand it's no longer shipping with Windows. Office 365 is now where the money is, even for basic needs.

Get ReactOS' ISO. Mount it or extract it with 7zip.

Find the biggest CAB file, it weights lots of MB. Extract it. Copy Wordpad.exe anywhere else. Delete the rest if you want, or enjoy Sol.exe and friends.

Post reply on HN